-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
THE VP DEBATE: Thursday Night Fights, Round 1 ... WHO "WON" .. ???
- Thread starter A4sForever
- Start date
- Status
It's just a blind allegiance to your party. My mom is an Obama homer..it drives me nuts. In her eyes, anything Obama says is gospel, anything McCain says is wrong/lies or whatever.
You can't reason with this type of person. Blind faith to anything can be dangerous.
Well, you bring up a good point. Either:You might be right: but the McCain campaign maintains they only knew about it on Tuesday, i.e., yesterday. It must be yesterday as I took the garbage out this morning, so that means today is Wednesday ...
Sooooooooooo ... I guess that means they are lying, yea-as ??? And you would KNOW this ... that they are "lying" ... that they "knew about it" .... how ???
a) They knew about it and are now lying
b) They did not know about it and are inept
I chose a), but perhaps I should give b) a second look.:icon_wink
Welcome to the vast vast majority of voters on both sides of the line. There was an study done researching how shockingly loyal people are to their candidate of choice despite undisputable facts being presented to them. The author was unquestionably biased to the left, but if you could sift through that, I found the meat of the article very interesting. It painted a good picture of just how much like sheep/lemmings many people really are.
Unfortunately I can't seem to find it again >.< Maybe someone else will recognize what I'm talking about and post it.
Along the same lines....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/05/AR2008090502666.html
Maybe, but the Commission on Presidential Debates picked the moderators a year ago. The Commission has reported that they did not know about the book because she never told them. Then again, the Commission claims it would not have made any difference. I doubt that. Haven't we all heard about the evils of the "appearance of impropriety."? Personally, I think she will probably do a fine job. It just looks bad. Something that should have been avoided.
She has stumbled lately to be sure (well considering the 6 or so bad clips shown over and over out of dozens of hours of interview ). It isn't true though that she does not give a good interview. Haven't any of you seen the CNBC interview given barely two weeks before her pick. It was a straight up interview about energy the economy and business. It was a very good interview. No problems at all. Further, she does not have a reputation for poor debates or interviews in Alaska politics. Hell, she was a TV journalist. I think she is being over prepped. Her world was kicked into full blower and people started taking shots at her immediately. She is just catching up. I don't think that is disqualifer for a VP.
D_Rob
Lead LTJG
Saw this today. On Aug 21 she wrote an article for Time and identified herself as writing this new book.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1834321,00.html
It's not like she was hiding it. I agree she will do a good job and will be impartial.
I do not understand people not voting for McCain because they think Governor Palin isn't qualified to be VP; do you really think Senator Obama is qualified to be President...?
Palin can debate and interview fine, and she is just as intelligent as Senator Obama and Senator Biden, the problem is that she is out of her area at the moment; she probably is a bit of a stranger to foreign policy. Now I'd bet that Senator Obama was in the same boat as Governor Palin when he first started running for office, the thing is that he has had over a year to prep and get his foreign policy knowledge up to speed.
Governor Palin has only had weeks.
Furthermore, I think the Republicans made a huge mistake in criticizing Senator Obama for lacking foreign policy experience. The only people in government with real foreign policy experience would be the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, or the President. Ronald Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and G.W. Bush all lacked foreign policy experience when they entered office.
What the Republicans should have criticized Senator Obama on was his foreign policy knowledge and his foreign policy proposals, and I suppose the fact that he hasn't really run anything. This way, no one in the media could criticize Governor Palin for lacking foreign policy "experience" IMO. And if they still did, Republicans could mention that actual experience in foreign policy isn't necessary.
I have no doubt that if McCain is elected, Governor Palin will, over a period of months, get herself up to speed on foreign policy.
But personally, I think McCain really blew it completely in the last debate. He has had ample time to learn enough about the economy and taxes and so forth to crush Senator Obama in that aspect, and he just let Senator Obama take it completely. He had no comebacks, I am guessing because he had no knowledge. He never even bothered to mention about the middle class, and how Senator Obama's plans will hurt them, which Senator Obama noted and made a big speech about the following day.
Okay, I can understand the economy isn't his strongpoint. And it wasn't smart to say that he had bought Alan Greenspan's book to try and help him. But he's had months to learn enough by now. And that debate was an ample opportunity to tell Americans that Senator Obama's economic plans could destroy this nation's economy.
Senator Obama is weaker than Senator McCain on foreign policy knowledge, but you could tell that Senator Obama had studied up as much as he could.
And after the debate, the Obama campaign even said that they were surprised at McCain, that they had been expecting a much stronger response from him on taxes, the economy, etc...
I am beginning to wonder just what kind of folks are running his campaign. They prepped him terribly for the economy it seems, and apparently they didn't know until Tuesday that Gwen Ifill is authoring a book partially about Senator Obama (something that I have been aware of for the past two weeks).
This is a very important election and Senator McCain is going to just hand it over to Obama if he performs in the next debates, on economic issues, the way he did in the previous debate, unless the economy leaves people's current list of worries.
I hold hope he will get his knowledge on these subjects improved, but if he hasn't by now, I don't know.
As for Gwen Ifill, IMO unless she is a fool, she will be impartial in moderating this debate. The last thing an Obama supporter would want to do is visibly be biased against Governor Palin, which could draw her sympathy from women.
Palin can debate and interview fine, and she is just as intelligent as Senator Obama and Senator Biden, the problem is that she is out of her area at the moment; she probably is a bit of a stranger to foreign policy. Now I'd bet that Senator Obama was in the same boat as Governor Palin when he first started running for office, the thing is that he has had over a year to prep and get his foreign policy knowledge up to speed.
Governor Palin has only had weeks.
Furthermore, I think the Republicans made a huge mistake in criticizing Senator Obama for lacking foreign policy experience. The only people in government with real foreign policy experience would be the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, or the President. Ronald Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and G.W. Bush all lacked foreign policy experience when they entered office.
What the Republicans should have criticized Senator Obama on was his foreign policy knowledge and his foreign policy proposals, and I suppose the fact that he hasn't really run anything. This way, no one in the media could criticize Governor Palin for lacking foreign policy "experience" IMO. And if they still did, Republicans could mention that actual experience in foreign policy isn't necessary.
I have no doubt that if McCain is elected, Governor Palin will, over a period of months, get herself up to speed on foreign policy.
But personally, I think McCain really blew it completely in the last debate. He has had ample time to learn enough about the economy and taxes and so forth to crush Senator Obama in that aspect, and he just let Senator Obama take it completely. He had no comebacks, I am guessing because he had no knowledge. He never even bothered to mention about the middle class, and how Senator Obama's plans will hurt them, which Senator Obama noted and made a big speech about the following day.
Okay, I can understand the economy isn't his strongpoint. And it wasn't smart to say that he had bought Alan Greenspan's book to try and help him. But he's had months to learn enough by now. And that debate was an ample opportunity to tell Americans that Senator Obama's economic plans could destroy this nation's economy.
Senator Obama is weaker than Senator McCain on foreign policy knowledge, but you could tell that Senator Obama had studied up as much as he could.
And after the debate, the Obama campaign even said that they were surprised at McCain, that they had been expecting a much stronger response from him on taxes, the economy, etc...
I am beginning to wonder just what kind of folks are running his campaign. They prepped him terribly for the economy it seems, and apparently they didn't know until Tuesday that Gwen Ifill is authoring a book partially about Senator Obama (something that I have been aware of for the past two weeks).
This is a very important election and Senator McCain is going to just hand it over to Obama if he performs in the next debates, on economic issues, the way he did in the previous debate, unless the economy leaves people's current list of worries.
I hold hope he will get his knowledge on these subjects improved, but if he hasn't by now, I don't know.
As for Gwen Ifill, IMO unless she is a fool, she will be impartial in moderating this debate. The last thing an Obama supporter would want to do is visibly be biased against Governor Palin, which could draw her sympathy from women.
Are you really going to say this? Honestly? You do realize that after finally settling on a college, she in the end got a journalism degree from U of Idaho. Somehow I don't think that quite compares to Obama or Biden's educations. You can claim life experience all you want but she hasn't exactly proven herself as intelligent on...well...anything yet. I'd be happy to see my potential president (yes, McCain is old and she really is that close to the highest office in this country) show some sort of intelligence. As it stands, she absolutely frightens me. McCain has a legitimate chance of winning and I just want to know that she has more potential than I've seen so far. I'd certainly be more comfortable if she was able to knock it out of the park this evening.
Since we are just marking time until the VP debate I want to get back to my favorite subject, Y2K McCainiacs or otherwise disaffected McCain supporters.
You sir, do not know McCain if you are surprised or even disappointed in any perceived change from 2000, or even the primaries. If you really believe he is pandering to the far right of the GOP in this general election you are smoking something. In every modern election the presidential candidate satisfies the base of their party during the primary and then moves to the middle for the general. McCain is doing the same. He is sounding not only more moderate, but far off the reservation for true Conservative in this general election. Where do you get your political news? You don't think he is being a maverick now? He is all over the map. He doesn't have a solid base. If there a Maverick Base I missed back in 2000? I'll say it again. Being a Maverick means never having to define your core principles. It is cover for taking what ever expedient stand suits you at the time. Being a maverick means never having to say you are sorry. That said, he is light years better then Obama. If you are an Obama supporter, fine. Just say so. Don't give us this crap about how disappointed you are in McCain, about how he lost you. Some positions have changed since 2000, but not as much as you think. Don't blame McCain if you think you have to support Sen. Obama. Anyone that thinks Obama is preferable over the 2008 edition of McCain must not have ever been much of a McCain supporter. Talk about a flip flop. And for the record. I think Palin would be a very good president TODAY. I have ten times the respect for her over Sen Obama. I think she is more grounded, more genuine, harder working, more humorous, more sincere, has more executive experience, is more knowledgeable on energy, more pro business, has no ties to Democratic thieves in Congress, and is at least as intelligent as Sen Obama, just to get you started. If she were president today, even with the financial problems and the GWOT, she would do no harm. Can't say that about Sen Obama.
Elitists education snob!! Top tier schools and law degrees only need apply? Those are the idiots in congress that need to go. Oh it isn't about education you say, it is about intelligence? And just how much of an IQ (if that is what you are talking about) does it take to be president? Give me an idea. And how have you determined she is unintelligent? Because of a few poor answers in some interviews that were anything but friendly? What do you know about her political career? Heard many speeches, interviews, or debates? Sat in on any policy session with her cabinet did you? I'd like to know how you become governor of a sovereign state (oh I forgot, Alaska is a backwater, nothing like a eastern establishment state like Delaware) and not have some brains. Or is there something different about her brain. You know, she looks even less like the presidents on the dollar bills then Obama. Is it possible, even just a little, that you don't take her seriously because she is an attractive woman. I mean it is possible, right? We all know a thing or two about working class bimbos. No way they are as smart as a guy that went to Harvard. Hell, McCain probably drug a dollar bill through a trailer park to find her, right?
Not to say names but I certainly won't say the last seven and a half years have been good for America. Presidents should not be "Joe six-pack". Historically presidents have been very intelligent, and even if I can personally relate with a candidate, is it wrong to say that I don't want somebody as plain and ordinary as me running the country?
It isn't as if they asked her anything unexpected or particularly difficult. Or are we referring to a student asking her about Pakistan while in a restaurant? I guess it's just all "gotcha journalism". Or here's an example of these tough interviews:
Are you really saying this? Give me a f'in break. I have been a huge supporter of Kay Bailey Hutchison despite not agreeing with some of her policy. She is a wonderful, brilliant woman. Sarah Palin does not even compare. I could name countless women who I have great respect.
Fight's on!
- Status